Is Voter Fraud Like Littering?: Empirical and Methodological Considerations

Authors

  • David Schultz

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15763/issn.2374-7781.2012.33.0.233-243

Abstract

The dispute over the extent of voter fraud and voter identification is certain to affect to the 2012 elections. But this debate is muddled in a methodological and evidentiary mess, conducted with little or no reliable data. This article examines the methodological issues in studying voter fraud. The basic argument is that arguments about fraud are often made without reference to a methodology dictated by good social science research. In effect, assertions of voter fraud often invoke untestable claims. Second, inference that the few reported instances of fraud are proof of more extensive occurrences is baseless to the extent that parallels are drawn to speeding or littering. The latter do not pro- vide an analogy to voter fraud. Thus, assertions about voter fraud have generally failed to provide serious social science evidence or testable propositions to test claims.

References

Bernstein, Richard J. 1976. The Restructuring of Social and Political Theory. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Center for Democracy and Election Management, American University. 2005. Building Confidence in U.S. Elections: Report of the Commission on Federal Election Reform [hereinafter Carter-Baker Commission]. Document located at http://www.american.edu/ia/cfer/report/full_report.pdf (site last visited on June 29, 2012).

Crawford v. Marion County Election Board. 2007. 472 F.3d. 949 (7th Cir. Ind).

Frankfort-Nachmias, Chava, and David Nachmias. 2000. Research Methods in the Social Sciences. New York: St. Martin's Press.

Fund, John. 2004. Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy. New York: Encounter Books.

Indiana Democratic Party v. Rokita. 2006. 458 F.Supp.2d 775 (D. Ind.).

Isaak, Alan C. 1985. Scope and Methods of Political Science. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt College Publishers.

Kant, Immanuel. 1965. Critique of Pure Reason. New York: St. Martin's Press.

Minnite, Lorraine C. 2010. The Myth of Voter Fraud. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Popper, Karl. 1959. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchinson & Co.

Rasmussen Reports. 2011. 75% Support Showing Photo ID at the Polls. Available at http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/june_011/7_support_showing_photo_id_at_the_polls (site last visited on June 2, 2012).

Scher, Richard K. 2011. The Politics of Disenfranchisement: Why Is It So Hard to Vote In America? Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

Schultz, David. 2008a. Less than Fundamental: The Myth of Voter Fraud and the Coming of the Second Great Disenfranchisement. William Mitchell Law Review 34:484-532.

Schultz, David. 2008b. Lies, Damn Lies, and Voter IDs: The Fraud of Voter Fraud. Harvard Law & Policy Review On-line. 1: 1-8. Available at http://hlpronline.com/2008/03/lies-damn-lies-and-voter-ids-the-fraud-of-voter-fraud/ (site last visited on June 2, 2012).

Seckel, Al. 1986. Bertrand Russell on God and Religion. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.

Singh, Simon. 2004. Big Bang: The Most Important Scientific Discovery of All Time and Why You Need to Know About It. New York: Harper Perennial.

Smith, Bradley. 2010. Election Law Listserv. Available at http://mailman.lls.edu/pipermail/election-law/2010-October/023420.html (site last visited on June 2, 2012).

United States Senate Republican Policy Committee. 2005. Putting an End to Voter Fraud. Document located at http://rpc.senate.gov/_files/Feb1504VoterFraudSD.pdf (site last visited on January 2, 2012).

Weiser, Wendy R., and Lawrence Norden. 2011. Voting Law Changes in 2012. New York: Brennan Center for Justice. Available at http://brennan.3cdn.net/9c0a034a4b3c68a2af_9hm6bj6d0.pdf (site last visited on June 2, 2012).

Wyckoff, Paul Gary. 2009. Policy & Evidence in a Partisan Age. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Downloads

Published

2012-11-01

Issue

Vol. 33: Fall 2012

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish with American Review of Politics agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.

  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.

  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:

    1. Attribution: other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;

    2. Non-Commercial: the materials may not be used for commercial purposes;

    3. Share Alike: If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.

with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.

  1. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

  2. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.

  3. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.

  1. The Author represents and warrants that:

    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;

    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;

    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;

    4. the Work has not previously been published;

    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and

    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.

  2. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.